CWP-13272-2020 & CWP-12832-2020 Page 1 of 5

102+201

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

***
Date of Decision: 1st September, 2020

1. CWP-12832-2020

Saurav Rao and others

Petitioners
Versus

Panjab University through its Registrar, Sector 14, Chandigarh and others

Respondents
WITH

2. CWP-13272-2020

Navya Raj
Petitioner
Versus

Panjab University, Chandigarh and others

Respondents

CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR

JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

***

Present: Mr. Deepak Vashishth, Advocate for the Petitioners

[in CWP-12832-2020].

Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for the Petitioner

[in CWP-13272-2020].

Mr. Arun Bakshi, Advocate

for the Respondents [in CWP-13272-2020] and
Respondent No. 1 [in CWP-12832-2020].

Ms. PreetiDalal, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3

[in CWP-12832-2020].

1 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2020 09:53:26 :::
CWP-13272-2020 & CWP-12832-2020 Page 2 of 5

***

Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.
1. The challenge in both these petitions is tothe decision of the Respondent/
Panjab University, Chandigarh (hereafter ‘University)’ to scrap the
UGLAW entrance test for admission to the B.A./B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5
years’ integrated course (hereafter ‘the 5-year law course’) for the academic
year 2020-21.

2.It requires to be noted at the outset that initially the University proposed
to hold an entrance exam for the 5-year law course and the date initially
fixed for the purpose kept getting cancelled and re-fixed on account of the
Covid-19 situation in the country. Prior to deciding to scrap the entrance
test the University had proposed to hold it on 4th October 2020.

3. The trigger for the present petitions is the circular dated 11th August 2020
issued by the University announcing that it has “scrapped the UGLAW
entrance test”, considering the Covid-19 situation. The said circular also
sets out a fresh schedule for the admission process which inter alia states
that a tentative merit list would be displayed on the website of the
University by the evening of 22nd September 2020 and after inviting
objections thereto the provisional list would be displayed by the evening of
29th September 2020.

4. It is common ground that as a result of the UGLAW entrance test for the
5-year law course being scrapped the admission of students would be
essentially on the basis of the marks obtained in the 10+2 examination.

5. The submission of the Petitioners who have applied for the 5-year law
course is that the excuse of Covid-19 for scrapping the entrance test is not
valid when in fact the University is holding entrance exams for other
courses including the three year law course for the same academic session.
They further submit that the 12th standard marks as a sole criterion for
determining the suitability of a candidate for admission to the 5-year law

2 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2020 09:53:27 :::
CWP-13272-2020 & CWP-12832-2020 Page 3 of 5

course would not be either a reasonable or a reliable one. It renders the

admission process arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Reference is made to the recent orders of the Supreme Court declining to
postpone or scrap the holding of entrance exams for courses elsewhere in
the country.

6. Notice of motion in both petitions. Notice is accepted by counsel for

Respondents as indicated in the appearances above. With the consent of
counsel for the parties the petitions are finally disposed of by this order
since the point involved is short and requires urgent directions,

7. It requires to be noted at the outset that when CWP-12832-2020was

taken up for hearing yesterday i.e. on 31st August, 2020, a submission was
made by Mr. Deepak Vashishth, learned counsel for the Petitioner,that the
University was in fact going ahead with holding the entrance examination
for the three-year law course and therefore, there was no reason for it to
scrap the entrance examination for the 5-yearlaw course.Mr. Arun Bakshi,
learned counsel appearing for the University sought time to obtain
instructions on whether this was correct.

8. Today, Mr. Bakshi confirms that the University would indeed hold the
entrance exam for the three-year law course. In response to a query from
the Court he sought to justify the University’s decision on the ground that
on account of the fact that the final year examination for some of the
graduate courses like B.A. have not yet been conducted, the admissions to
the three-year law course would require the holding of an entrance exam
whereas as far as the 5-year law course is concerned, since the results of
10+2 exam have been declared, the University felt that it could dispense
with the holding of an entrance examand make admissions on the basis of
marks obtained in the 10+2 examination.

9. There is merit in the contention of the Petitioners that the avowed reason
as stated in the circular dated 11th August 2020 viz., the ‘Covid-19

3 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2020 09:53:27 :::
CWP-13272-2020 & CWP-12832-2020 Page 4 of 5

situation’ does not hold good when in fact the University is holding the
entrance exam for the three-year law course.

10. As regards the reason now put forth before the Court by Mr. Bakshi, on
instructions from the University, for scrapping the entrance exam for the 5-
year law course, the Court does not find it to be either satisfactory or
reasonable. Mr. Vikas Chatrath, learned counsel for the Petitioner in CWP-
13272-2020 referred to the decision in Shri Chander Chinar Bada Akhara
Udasin Society v. State of J&K (1996) 5 SCC 732, where in the context of
the need to hold a common entrance exam for admission to the MBBS
course, the Supreme Court inter alia, observed as under:

“It need not be pointed out that the percentage of marks secured
by different applicants at different types of examinations at the
higher secondary stage cannot be treated as uniform. Some of
such examinations are conducted at the state level, others at the
national level including the Indian School Certificate
examination. The percentage secured at different examinations
are bound to vary according to the standard applied by such
examining bodies, which is a well known. As such a common
entrance examination has to be held.”

11. The Court finds the above observations to be apposite in the present
context. Given the fact that there is generally little scope of inclusion of law
based subjects in the syllabus for the 10+2 classes, it is not possible to make
a comparative assessment of suitability of candidates for admission to the 5-
year law course solely on the basis of marks obtained in the 10+2 exam. It
would not be safe or reliable to either give equal weightage to the
performance of students in the science, arts, commerce streams in the 10+2
level or give preference to one over the other in adjudging the suitability for
the 5-year law course. It requires to be noted that the Common Law
Admission Test (CLAT) for admission to the national law schools for the
current academic session has not been scrapped. The UGC’s stand in regard
to holding of entrance tests for admission to various courses also requires to
be taken note of.

4 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2020 09:53:27 :::
CWP-13272-2020 & CWP-12832-2020 Page 5 of 5

12. The Court is of the considered view that given the requirements of the
5-year law course and considering the fact that the University is in fact
holding the entrance examination for the three year law course, the reason
put forth for scrapping the entrance examination for the 5 year law course
does not appears to be justified.

13. In the circumstances, the Court disposes of these petitions with a

direction to the University to re-consider its decision to scrap the UGLAW
entrance examination for the 5-year law course as expressed in its circular
dated 11th August 2020 and take a fresh decision in that regard not later
than 15th September, 2020 keeping in view the observations of this Court in
the present order and the grounds raised in these petitions. The said decision
will be uploaded on the website of the University immediately after it is
taken. Till such time, the University will not proceed with making
admissions to the B.A./B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years’ integrated law
course on the basis of the Circular dated 11th August, 2020 as well as
guidelines uploaded on the website of the University on 25th August, 2020.

14. A photocopy of this order be placed in the file of connected case.

[S. MURALIDHAR]
JUDGE

[AVNEESH JHINGAN]
JUDGE
1st September, 2020
pankaj baweja

Whether speaking / reasoned: Yes

Whether reportable : Yes

5 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2020 09:53:27 :::